Processes of similarity judgment

Cognitive Science

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1061-1076

  Larkey, Levi B ^a   Markman, Arthur B ^b  

^a LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive modeling; Knowledge representation; Psychology; Similarity

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645101485     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_30     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Bassok, M. (1990). Transfer of domain-specific problem-solving procedures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 522-533.
2. Biederman, I. (1985). Human image understanding: Recent research and a theory. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 32, 29-73.
3. Davenport, J., & Keane, M. T. (1999). Similarity & structural alignment: You can have one without the other. In H. Hahn & S. C. Stoness (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 132-137). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
4. Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.
5. Fodor, J. A., & Pylyshyn, Z. (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition, 28, 3-71.
6. Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., Markman, A. B., & Ferguson, R. W. (1998). Analogy just looks like high-level perception: Why a domain-general approach to analogical mapping is right. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 10, 231-257.
7. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
8. Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52, 45-56.
9. Goldstone, R. L. (1994). Similarity, interactive activation, and mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 3-28.
10. Goldstone, R. L. (1998). Hanging together: A connectionist model of similarity. In J. Grainger & A. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition (pp. 283-325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
11. Goldstone, R. L., & Medin, D. L. (1994). The time course of comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 29-50.
12. Hahn, U., Chater, N., & Richardson, L. B. (2003). Similarity as transformation. Cognition, 87, 1-32.
13. Hintzman, D. L. (1986). Schema abstraction in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 93, 411-428.
14. Hofstadter, D. R. (1984). The Copycat project: An experiment in nondeterminism and creative analogies (Al Memo 755). Cambridge, MA: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
15. Hofstadter, D. R. (1995). Fluid concepts and creative analogies: Computer models of the fundamental mechanisms of thought. New York, Basic Books.
16. Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 13, 295-355.
17. Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review, 104, 427-466.
18. Imai, S. (1977). Pattern similarity and cognitive transformations. Acta Psychologica, 41, 433-447.
19. Keane, M. T., & Brayshaw, M. (1988). The incremental analogical machine: A computational model of analogy. In D. Sleeman (Ed.), European Working Session on Third Learning (pp. 53-62). London: Pitman.
20. Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Kaufmann.
21. Larkey, L. B., & Love, B. C. (2003). CAB: Connectionist analogy builder. Cognitive Science, 27, 781-794.
22. Markman, A. B. (1999). Knowledge representation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
23. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1993a). Splitting the differences: A structural alignment view of similarity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 517-535.
24. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1993b). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 431-467.
25. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1996). Commonalities and differences in similarity comparisons. Memory and Cognition, 24, 235-249.
26. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1997). The effects of alignability on memory. Psychological Science, 8, 363-367.
27. Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (2000). Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology, 113, 501-538.
28. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
29. Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Markman, A. B. (1995). Comparison and choice: Relations between similarity processes and decision processes. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 1-19.
30. Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85, 207-238.
31. Minsky, M. (1981). A framework for representing knowledge. In J. Haugland (Ed.), Mind design (pp. 95-128). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Mitchell, M. (1993). Analogy-making as perception: A computer model. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Narvaez, L., & Markman, A. B. (2005). Studying similarity requires making representational assumptions. Manuscript in preparation.
34. Navarro, D. J., & Lee, M. D. (2003). Combining dimensions and features in similarity-based representations. In S. Becker, S. Thrun, & K. Obermayer (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 15, pp. 67-74). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 115, 39-57.
36. Nosofsky, R. M. (1992). Exemplar-based approach to relating categorization, identification, and recognition. In F. G. Ashby (Ed.), Multidimensional models of perception and cognition (pp. 363-394). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
37. Novick, L. R. (1988). Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 510-520.
38. Novick, L. R. (1990). Representational transfer in problem solving. Psychological Science, 1, 128-132.
39. Osherson, D. N., Smith, E. E., Wilkie, O., Lopez, A., & Shafir, E. (1990). Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97, 185-200.
40. Posner, M. I., & Keele, S. W. (1968). On the genesis of abstract idea. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 353-363.
41. Reed, S. K. (1972). Pattern recognition and categorization. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 382-407.
42. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblance: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605.
43. Shepard, R. N. (1962a). The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function: Part I. Psychometrika, 27, 125-140.
44. Shepard, R. N. (1962b). The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function: Part II: Psychometrika, 27, 219-246.
45. Shepard, R. N. (1972). Psychological representation of speech sounds. In J. E. E. David & P. B. Denes (Eds.), Human communication: A unified view. New York: McGraw-Hill.
46. Shepard, R. N., & Arabie, P. (1979). Additive clustering: Representation of similarities as combinations of discrete overlapping properties. Psychological Review, 86, 87-123.
47. Smith, E. E. (1990). Categorization. In D. N. Osherson & E. E. Smith (Eds.), Thinking: An invitation to cognitive science (pp. 33-54). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Tenenbaum, J. B. (1996). Learning the structure of similarity. In G. Tesauro, D. S. Touretzky, & T. K. Leen (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 8, pp. 4-9). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
49. Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327-352.
50. Wiener-Ehrlich, W. K., Bart, W. M., & Millward, R. (1980). An analysis of generative representation systems. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 21, 219-246.
51. Yan, J., Forbus, K., & Gentner, D. (2003). A theory of rerepresentation in analogical matching. In R. Alterman & D. Kirsch (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.